The provocation defence for murder should be repealed?
On average, everyone agrees with significant nonconsensus between 25 voters.
Please read the comments from other voters below, then scroll down make your decision. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
The provocation defence for murder should be repealed
Reasons To Disagree
The recent case has, predictably and assisted by the media, caused knee jerk reaction. But there clearly can be a legitimate ground for pleading provacation. I can see no reason to define what defences are to be allowed. Let the defendant give his "reasons" for the crime - it is up to the JURY to decide whether those reasons are legitimate or not. I strongly believe that lawyers and judges do more to screw up our justice system than they contemplate. It's all a game to them - that game being Monopoly - and they're the (w)bankers.
4 August 2009
The mother of the girl who was brutely murdered upstairs in her room, would have had a perfect provication defence, had she killed the guy who killed her daughter. But he had no moral right to use the defence, although we have to allow anyone to legally use it if it is to be law at all. The media should however excercise greater judgement in what they replay on TV.
31 July 2010
It should be allowed but only when the provocation is extreme and what the proverbial "reasonable person" would consider sufficient grounds.
10 October 2010
Reasons To Agree
There are a few cases where procication is a factor but this could be considered under other sections of the law.
1 August 2009
Most definitely should be scrapped. No excuses, you either committed the crime or you didn't and you should be sentenced accordingly.
6 September 2013
Reasons for Remain NeutralNo reasons have yet been given to remain neutral.
You can make your comments once you have voted.